Skip to main content
February 28, 2009
Question

The Big Picture

  • February 28, 2009
  • 234 replies
  • 17801 views
I think what is not being understood by some participants in these discussion is the scale of change which will follow the transition to the new forums.

Have a look at http://www.jivesoftware.com/products/clearspace-community and you'll see that the purpose of the Clearspace Community software goes way beyond the objectives that might be deduced of the current forums and their underlying software.

My personal take on things is that Adobe have decided that the whole style of the user interactions and community here is no longer appropriate to their corporate needs. There was a time when provision of a support forum was not seen as much related to the main thrust of company objectives, but those days have gone. Online communities are now one of the chief means of interaction between a corporation and its customers - and it's a two way channel. Interaction between those customers is also facilitated by within the online community but that's not necessarily deemed to be the key objective.

The forthcoming change represents, sadly, the end of this community and the creation of a new and very different one. The functional elements and the look and feel of their presentation in the Jive software are carefully designed to foster a particular style of interaction between users of Adobe software, and beween the users and the company. The functions and form are designed for an over-riding purpose and to support an overarching communications philosophy, not thrown in upon a whim.

It seems very clear to me that Adobe expects that the new community will have a significantly different flavour to the old, and that they will have anticipated that not all of the present members of this (and the Macromedia) communities will feel at home in the new one. There's no need to warn Adobe that some people will be unhappy enough not to return - they will have accepted that risk at the outset.

While there will be an inevitable loss of expertise, and it will be sad to see the last of some regular participants here, it seems clear to me that Adobe are hoping that the new style of community (moulded by the software they have chosen to create it) will bring in new members who may well have considerable expertise in the products, but who have not felt encouraged to participate in the style of community we have here now. The company will also be hoping that those newly requiring support will find the new site to be more effective and simpler to use than the old, and that the site will enable the company image and the strengths and usage of the product lines to be put across more clearly.

That, as I see it, is the big picture. There's not much point in discussing the points of detail unless in the context of the overall company objectives in making these changes - and if you disagree with the whole underlying premise of the changes, then there's little chance that you'll like much of the detail either.
    This topic has been closed for replies.

    234 replies

    David_Powers
    Inspiring
    March 1, 2009
    > The vast majority of posts have been part of a genuine and dedicated effort to uphold and improve the forums

    I don't doubt the sincerity of the majority of people. I think everyone wants an easily searchable, clean system that's easy to use. I went to look the thread you suggested. It certainly begins with a lot of positive ideas, most of which I would agree with.

    Unfortunately, that thread has more than 330 posts; and the only way to see the first 199 is to go through them five at a time, because the "Show all messages" link always starts at message 200. Looking through the later messages, many of them degenerate into the sort of rant I originally referred to. It seems as though there's the same mix of serious posters and inveterate ranters over here in the Webx forums as in the former Macromedia ones. :(

    As far as I can tell, all the recent noise is about what people fear the new forums will be like. I haven't seen comments from anyone who has seen how Adobe proposes to configure the Jive Clearspace software. Presumably anyone who has seen it would be under NDA, and can't say anything. For all I know it could be wonderful, or it could be terrible. Until I've actually tried it, I won't be able to make up my mind.
    PJonesCET
    Participating Frequently
    March 1, 2009
    wonder how much trouble it would be to setup an Adobe products group outside of Adobe.

    FileMaker Pro has one in which a group out of Australia runs. Its not associated with FileMaker other than is listed as suggested support groups.

    Migh be something we could look into. If the changes are to drastic.
    Known Participant
    March 1, 2009
    "Reputation management."

    I smell a new detestable buzzphrase.

    There's a guy who fancies himself a "reputation manager" who is linked with trying to pay people off if they'll remove from their blogs negative posts about Cash4Gold.com.

    He's a skeezy douche working to manage the reputation of a sleazy company.

    I have more thoughts about the larger discussion as started by Peter, but I need to build up a good head of steam first before I commit them to type.

    I may need to hire an R.M. by the time I get done.

    :)
    Jacob Bugge
    Community Expert
    Community Expert
    March 1, 2009
    >Most of what I have read appears to a lot of ranting by people who don't seem to want to move from their own comfort zone.

    Then read the countless other posts, not only here in this new discussion forum, but also in the original forum about changes, especially the thread beginning thus:

    PECourtejoie, "Forum Feature Requests" #1, 12 Aug 2006 3:27 pm

    The vast majority of posts have been part of a genuine and dedicated effort to uphold and improve the forums, by a large number of serious, dedicated, and concerned, members, some of whom may occasionally burst into more emotional and colourful statements, especially when faced with statements that seem to indicate that all the effort, with all the suggestions, explanations, testing, and arguments, has been wasted because it will just be swept away.

    Some of us, namely those able to get access, worked hard, wholehearted, and unreserved, during the nightmare of the latest attempted forum merge, answering questions and reporting back, partaking in the joint effort to keep the forums running.

    >What matters to me in the end, though, is the quality of content and ease of use.

    That is exactly what has been the main focus of all the countless posts mentioned above.
    David_Powers
    Inspiring
    March 1, 2009
    Most of what I have read appears to a lot of ranting by people who don't seem to want to move from their own comfort zone. I'm just as unhappy about the loss of NNTP support as others are about the idea of avatars and titles.

    What matters to me in the end, though, is the quality of content and ease of use. To suggest that they will cease to be user-to-user forums is nonsense.
    Kath-H
    Inspiring
    March 1, 2009
    Probably going to be run from an Indian call centre.
    Ramón G Castañeda
    Inspiring
    March 1, 2009
    From everything I've read in the various threads here, it would seem that the forums will cease to be the Adobe user to user forums. It's Adobe's prerogative, naturally, and stressing that would render all these discussions moot.
    David_Powers
    Inspiring
    March 1, 2009
    FWIW, the Adobe Community Help system, for which I'm a moderator (for Dreamweaver), already uses a system of "Community Points". Moderators are asked to award points ranging from 5 to 50 for helpful comments. Unfortunately, most "comments" are questions, and 98% of the answers come from the moderators themselves. As a result, they end up earning most of the points, which are assessed by another moderator or administrator.

    The points don't have any tangible value, but are meant to be a way of identifying the most helpful people, with a view to identifying suitable people to invite as future moderators. Whether the introduction of Community Points in the forums will work any better is, to my mind, doubtful. However, there's no way of telling until it's tried.

    I'm sure some people will treat it as a game to see how quickly they can build up a score. If that results in better quality posts, everyone gains. Since you can't award points to yourself, I suppose it might work.
    March 1, 2009
    The thread you linked to, Jacob, discusses the concept of "reputation management" - new one on me, but that illustrates the kind of thinking that goes into the forum features. Of course that doesn't mean that you have to like it, but it's not done for fun but for reasons that are the subject of theory and research. To counter them, it's not enough to say "I don't like it". The response to that would be something along the lines of "but it's good for you".

    > I, for one, should like to see a comment/confirmation/denial from John concerning this.

    What I've set out is my take on things as a personal view. He might indeed say that he thinks I've got it wrong, but if there's no comment, I wouldn't read anything into that.
    Jacob Bugge
    Community Expert
    Community Expert
    March 1, 2009
    I, for one, should like to see a comment/confirmation/denial from John concerning this.

    I just had a less pleasant look at a couple of threads, including this one:

    http://www.jivesoftware.com/clearstep/thread/1049

    Apart from the specific contents, the actual information transferred is drowning and dragged out in poster decoration and indentation.

    The site refers to certain user options, but they seem to refer to display of own information, not overall appearance.